Has the Chavez foreign empire reached it's Zenith?

Diaspora

After 8 years in the job Chavez has ensured the election of freindly governments both in Ecaudor and particularly Bolivia under Morales. Now Peru has voted and firmly rejected the Chavista style canidature of Humulla whilst Chavez has used his TV show to lampoon Garcia the president elect and darling of the Peruvian working classes

Get over it Hugo is a domestic militia not enough?

DadaKopf

What's your own opinion on this? There have been at least two lengthy discussious about Chávez. But I reckon reports of the "Chavez foreign empire" are greatly exaggerated. I mean, don't you think other factors are behind the Ecuadoran and Bolivian elections than Chavez' political good will? For example, those particular Latin American countries, in addition to Argentina, have seen military juntas and socialist governments, the free market and state-led development. Now people trust neither and want something different.

Interestingly, Peru underwent a totally different set of circumstances and I'm not at all surprised that the Peruvian public voted as they did. Claiming a victory for the campaign to rollback the "Chavez (evil) empire" sounds to me like the US triumphalism sounded during the so-called Ukranian and Georgian revolutions, and look how those turned out.

And I'd suspect that the CIA-funded US National Endowment for Democracy had something to do with it.

ISAW

DadaKopf wrote:

But I reckon reports of the "Chavez foreign empire" are greatly exaggerated. I mean, don't you think other factors are behind the Ecuadoran and Bolivian elections than Chavez' political good will? ...

And I'd suspect that the CIA-funded US National Endowment for Democracy had something to do with it.

I note colombia recently returned a right winger for the second term for the first time ever.

DadaKopf

Colombia also has had a different experience to the others. Moreover, American interests are far more established there and, with the country basically in chaos because of the government's legalisation of paramilitaries, and the government prosecuting its war against FARC geurillas, the country is in turmoil.

Moreover, Uribe gets financial and other support from three sides, the US government, Colombia's elite class and the Medellin drug cartel - he's a relative of Pablo Escobar.

ISAW

DadaKopf wrote:

Colombia also has had a different experience to the others.

Well so far you have made special cases of Ecuador, Columbia, Peru, Argentina and Bolivia. Seems like ther are more South American "exceptions" than anything else.

Dirk Gently

Diaspora wrote:

chavez is an evil ruler of an empire....chavez installed puppet leaders in neighbouring countries.....chavez eats babies ...... other countries who elect left wing leaders only done so cos chavez made them........ there is never any outside interferance in elections to get a neo-liberial government installed........ chavez has a huge foreign empire...blah blah blah

The only point you make which I agree with is that Chavez should not have publicly backed a candidate in a foreign country. I'm sure you will agree that national elections should be internal affairs with the only outside participation being international observers if necessary. Unfortunately this is not the case in Latin America, with the U.S. funding and supporting groups which push the neo-liberal agenda. Chavez (wrongly IMO) decided to play the game too to counteract other foreign influences. I would prefer if the U.N had the balls to sanction countries who partake in outside interference through military, logistical and financial aid given to groups inside host countries for the purpose of getting a friendly government elected. Unfortunately the U.N. is very unlikely to do anything to stop the U.S. subverting democracy in these countries.

As for the Zenith of his "empire", this remains to be seen. There is a vote for a U.N. Security Council seat coming up soon. Latin America will get a seat and the usual way they decide is to get agreement from the countries involved to nominate someone. Venezuela has put its name forward and received good support. The U.S. (not a Latin American country) is pushing for that beacon of democracy and human rights Guatemala. The U.S. is busy "convincing" Central American states to back Guatemala, with the southern Latin states remaining mostly undecided. The U.S. recently said it "would not understand" if Chile voted for Venezuela at a recent meeting between the two countries. Chile staunchly refused to bow to U.S. interference in Latin affairs and stood firm that they would make up their mind at a later date.

I think this vote will do more to judge what way Latin America is swinging. Who will support Venezuela for the U.N. seat and who will be bribed or bullied by the U.S. into voting for Guatemala?

At the end of the day it is not about a Chavez "empire". Latin American countries are deciding whether or not to continue with the neo-liberal economic model which has mostly failed to bring about anything positive except make corporations very rich, or will they choose an economic system which supports public spending to improve health, education and housing for the citizens of those countries.

I think Chavez will find he has more influence if he continues to make progress on these issues in Venezuela and continues to support neighbouring countries as he is already doing with trade deals and messages of solidarity rather than getting involved in elections in neighbouring countries. It would help a lot if the U.S. also played by the rules and stopped interfering.

DadaKopf

ISAW wrote:

Well so far you have made special cases of Ecuador, Columbia, Peru, Argentina and Bolivia. Seems like ther are more South American "exceptions" than anything else.

No... I said that Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and one I didn't mention, Brazil, have interesting interconnections which seem to be contributing to the consolidation of a new political form in these countries. I said Colombia and Peru were different.

It has to do with factors such as the stalemate by the early 1990s where the people saw neither socialism, capitalism, militarism nor elitism as options. This situation, similar in these countries, have given rise to a new form of political support.

Part of this, too, is the rise powerful indigenous and poor communities' political voice. The thing about Colombia is that the polity remains fractured as a result of the tactical war of destabilisation between state and society. The objective of this war is to prevent what's happening in those other countries. This war is also prosecuted by the US through its "War on Drugs" - this arrangement suits the US. In the case of Peru, it's undergoing a recent political transition away from the populism of the Fujimori regime towards something where a viable alternative hasn't yet been articulated - Peru hasn't yet reached that stalemate situation. I would say Peru is about 10 years behind Venezuela in this regard. So... it's not like Peru has rejected Venezuelan political fashion as much as Peruvians are working through a process - politics is a process, and I suspect reports in the mainstream media about the election misrepresent the reality on the ground. I'll have a look around later.

ISAW

DadaKopf wrote:

It has to do with factors such as the stalemate by the early 1990s where the people saw neither socialism, capitalism, militarism nor elitism as options. This situation, similar in these countries, have given rise to a new form of political support.

While I accept your analysis as valid, I would think it naive that it seems they are closer to a Gran Canaria or Bolivarian South America than at any time. And where does Chile fugure?

Diaspora

A democracy where consensus politics and smooth transtitions have been the norm for a decade. The economy is also motoring and the middle class ballooning.

DadaKopf

Diaspora wrote:

A democracy where consensus politics and smooth transtitions have been the norm for a decade. The economy is also motoring and the middle class ballooning.

There ya go, ISAW. Sorry, I'm not familiar with Chile so didn't comment.